Effect of restoration material on marginal bone resorption around modified anatomic zirconia dental implants: A randomised controlled trial

Characteristics and Risk Factors for the Fracture of One-Piece Implants

Objective

The one-piece dental implant was originally designed to overcome the structural weaknesses of the two-piece implant. However, a fractured one-piece implant requires removal because the abutment cannot be repaired or replaced to support new prosthetic restorations. The aim of this study was to clarify the features and risk factors for fracture of the one-piece implant.

Methods

This study was designed as a retrospective case series research. The subjects were patients who were treated for fractures of the one-piece implant at a clinic in Japan between 2012 and 2021. Fractures of the one-piece implant were diagnosed by cone-beam computed tomography, and the association between age and duration from implant placement to fracture was analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey test.

Results

Eighteen patients and 20 one-piece implants (under 39 years: 5 patients and 6 implants; 40-59 years: 7 patients and 7 implants; over 60 years: 6 patients and 7 implants) had fractures in their one-piece implants. Of the fractured implants, 11 had a diameter of 3 mm, and 9 had a diameter of 4 mm. The mean durations up to implant fracture were 662 days in the younger group, 1467 days in the middle group, and 1239 days in older group, and the duration was significantly shorter in the younger group. In addition, 83.3% of fracture implants in the younger group were in the molar region. All fractures of the one-piece implants occurred under the bone margin. Two patients had torus mandibularis, and 1 patient was had bruxism.

Conclusions

One-piece implants in younger patients that are located in the lower molar position are the most susceptible to implant fracture, and the fracture occurred under the bone margin in all cases.

Biomaterials and Clinical Application of Dental Implants in Relation to Bone Density-A Narrative Review

Titanium has been the material of choice for dental implant fixtures due to its exceptional qualities, such as its excellent balance of rigidity and stiffness. Since zirconia is a soft-tissue-friendly material and caters to esthetic demands, it is an alternative to titanium for use in implants. Nevertheless, bone density plays a vital role in determining the material and design of implants. Compromised bone density leads to both early and late implant failures due to a lack of implant stability. Therefore, this narrative review aims to investigate the influence of implant material/design and surgical technique on bone density from both biomechanical and biological standpoints. Relevant articles were included for analysis. Dental implant materials can be fabricated from titanium, zirconia, and PEEK. In terms of mechanical and biological aspects, titanium is still the gold standard for dental implant materials. Additionally, the macro- and microgeometry of dental implants play a role in determining and planning the appropriate treatment because it can enhance the mechanical stress transmitted to the bone tissue. Under low-density conditions, a conical titanium implant design, longer length, large diameter, reverse buttress with self-tapping, small thread pitch, and deep thread depth are recommended. Implant material, implant design, surgical techniques, and bone density are pivotal factors affecting the success rates of dental implant placement in low-density bone. Further study is required to find the optimal implant material for a clinical setting's bone state.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of zirconia dental implants-A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

For the present review, the following focused question was addressed: In patients with root-analog dental implants, what is the effect of implants made of other materials than titanium (alloy) on implant survival, marginal bone loss (MBL), and technical and biological complications after at least 5 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic (Medline, Embase, Web of Science) search was performed to identify observational clinical studies published from January 2000 investigating a minimum of 20 commercially available zirconia implants with a mean follow-up of at least 60 months. Primary outcome was implant survival, secondary outcomes included peri-implant MBL, probing depths (PDs), and technical and biological complications. Meta-analyses were performed to evaluate implant survival, MBL, and PD.

RESULTS

From 5129 titles, 580 abstracts were selected, and 111 full-text articles were screened. Finally, 4 prospective and 2 retrospective observational clinical cohort studies were included for data extraction. Meta-analyses estimated after 5 years of loading mean values of 97.2% (95% CI 94.7-99.1) for survival (277 implants, 221 patients), 1.1 mm (95% CI: 0.9-1.3) for MBL (229 implants, 173 patients), and 3.0 mm (95% CI 2.5-3.4) for PDs (231 implants, 175 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

After 5 years, commercially available zirconia implants showed reliable clinical performance based on survival rates, MBL, and PD values. However, more well-designed prospective clinical studies and randomized clinical trials investigating titanium and zirconia implants are needed to confirm the presently evaluated promising outcomes.

Influence of Restorative Material on the Distribution of Loads to the Bone in Hybrid Abutment Crowns-In Vitro Study

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the load transmitted to the peri-implant bone by seven different restorative materials in single-unit rehabilitations with morse taper implants using a strain gauge. Materials: In a polyurethane block that simulated type III bone, a morse taper platform implant was installed (3.5 × 11 mm) in the center and 1 mm below the test base surface, and four strain gauges were installed around the implant, simulating the mesial, distal, buccal and lingual positions. Seven similar hybrid abutment crowns were crafted to simulate a lower premolar using different materials: 1-PMMA; 2-glass ceramic over resin matrix; 3-PEEK + lithium disilicate; 4-metal-ceramic; 5-lithium disilicate; 6-zirconia + feldspathic; 7-monolithic zirconia. All groups underwent axial and oblique loads (45 degrees) of 150 N from a universal testing machine. Five measurements (n = 5) were performed with each material and for each load type; the microdeformation data underwent statistical analysis. The data were obtained in microdeformation (με), and the significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the evaluation among the materials under either the axial load or the oblique load at 45 degrees. In turn, in the comparison between axial load and oblique load, there was a difference in load for all materials. Conclusion: The restorative material did not influence the load transmitted to the bone. Furthermore, the load transmitted to the bone was greater when it occurred obliquely at 45° regardless of the material used. In conclusion, it appeared that the different elastic modulus of each material did not influence the load transmission to the peri-implant bone.

Assessment of Current Knowledge, Awareness and Attitude Towards Dental Implants as a Treatment Option for Replacement of Missing Teeth in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVE

To assess the current level of knowledge, awareness, and attitude towards dental implants as a treatment option for the replacement of missing teeth in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A random sample of 1000 Saudis (including both males and females) from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, was selected. In accordance with research ethics codes, informed consent was obtained from research participants before approaching them via a structured online questionnaire using Google Forms; additionally, questionnaires were distributed in public places and promoted on social media to be answered anonymously. The data were coded, tabulated, and analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) software. Descriptive statistics were calculated.

RESULTS

Around more than half of the study population (56.3%) opted for dental implants as a treatment option if they had to choose among the various options, and for those who did not choose dental implants, high cost was the major factor. The Pearson correlation between dental implant information and whether it was provided by their dentists and age was significant, and the majority of those who heard about dental implants are between the ages of 30 and 50. Also, it was noted that many of the participants who were working in the government sector (49.5%) had dental implants and were aware that dental implants as a treatment option were provided by their dentist when compared to those who were working in the private sector (12.1%) and the unemployed (24.7%), and this difference was statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

It was also observed that there is inadequate knowledge regarding the longevity of dental implants, and participants who were working in the government sector had dental implants and were aware that dental implants as a treatment option were provided by their dentist when compared to those who were working in the private sector, and around half are not aware that dental implant treatment can be covered by insurance.